[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1516992793.30244.280.camel@infradead.org>
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2018 18:53:13 +0000
From: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>
To: "Van De Ven, Arjan" <arjan.van.de.ven@...el.com>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>,
Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: "Hansen, Dave" <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
Liran Alon <liran.alon@...cle.com>,
Laura Abbott <labbott@...hat.com>,
Andrew Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Janakarajan Natarajan <Janakarajan.Natarajan@....com>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>,
"Mallick, Asit K" <asit.k.mallick@...el.com>,
Radim Krcmár <rkrcmar@...hat.com>,
KarimAllah Ahmed <karahmed@...zon.de>,
Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com>,
"Nakajima, Jun" <jun.nakajima@...el.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
"Raj, Ashok" <ashok.raj@...el.com>,
Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>,
"Williams, Dan J" <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
KVM list <kvm@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC 09/10] x86/enter: Create macros to restrict/unrestrict
Indirect Branch Speculation
On Fri, 2018-01-26 at 18:44 +0000, Van De Ven, Arjan wrote:
> your question was specific to RSB not BTB. But please show the empirical evidence for RSB ?
We were hypothesising, which should have been clear from:
On Fri, 2018-01-26 at 09:11 +0000, David Woodhouse wrote:
> Likewise if the RSB only stores the low 31 bits of the target, SMEP
> isn't much help there either.
>
> Do we need to look again at the fact that we've disabled the RSB-
> stuffing for SMEP?
... and later...
On Fri, 2018-01-26 at 17:31 +0000, David Woodhouse wrote:
> Note, we've switched from talking about BTB to RSB here, so this is a
> valid concern if the *RSB* only has the low bits of the target.
I'm glad to hear that it *isn't* a valid concern for the RSB and the
code in Linus' tree is correct.
Thank you for clearing that up.
Download attachment "smime.p7s" of type "application/x-pkcs7-signature" (5213 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists